It is obvious that an illustration cited or provided in the protologue of a name can play vital role in typifying the name. In several cases it is observed that an illustration has been designated as lectotype. However, while selecting an illustration as lectotype it should be ensured that no cited isotype, syntype, isosyntype or paratype exists (which are to be given precedence), otherwise the lectotype designation will not be in conformity with Art. 9.12 of ICN (McNeill et al. 2012). If no cited specimens exist, the lectotype must be chosen from among the uncited specimens and then from the cited and uncited illustrations that comprise the remaining original material, if such exist. Clarke (1874) in the protologue of Championia multiflora Clarke (1874: 99) [currently accepted as Leptoboea multiflora (Clarke) Benth. ex Gamble (1881: 274)] cited “Hab. In collibus Khasia ad 500–5000 ped. alt. In Assam et Bhotan. In Sikkim ad 1000–5000 ped. alt. frequens”. Hence, the relevant specimens from the cited localities, i.e. Assam, Bhotan and Sikkim, studied by Clarke qualify as syntypes. Sinha & Datta (2016: 30) designated the plate (t. 68) given in the protologue as the lectotype of C. multiflora, but this is also contradictory to Art. 9.12 (also see Ex. 13 of Art. 9.19) of ICN (McNeill et al. 2012) because the cited syntypes should get priority over illustration given in the protologue during lectotype designation. We searched for these type specimens at CAL, K and P, and found that six of these specimens [CAL0000027254!; CAL0000027256!; CAL0000027257! P03552784 (image!); P03552790 (image!); P03552791 (image!); P03552792 (image!)] are present at CAL and P, which completely agree with the protologue.
The three Kew specimens (K000898143 image!, K000898144 image!, K000898147 image!) are from Punkabari, Darjeeling. So they do not agree with the localities mentioned in the protologue. The collection of Hooker & Thomson (K000898148 image!) is from Khasia but there is no indication about the elevation and also without any annotation by Clarke.
The specimens available at CAL (CAL0000027254!; CAL0000027256!; CAL0000027257!) were examined by Clarke (1874: 99) prior to publication of the name and all the sheets have the manuscript name Didymocarpea scabra written in Clarke’s own handwriting. The name D. scabra was first used by Clarke for the species. This can be evidenced by Clarke’s statement given in the protologue of C. multiflora “I formerly called this plant in ms. Didymocarpaea scabra, under the idea that it was closely allied to the shrubby Didymocarpi. But it differs widely in the strictly septicidal dehiscence of the fruit, hich I overlooked altogether”. We designate here C.B. Clarke 5537 (Saohar, Khasiya, 500 (ft), 3 Oct 1867, C.B. Clarke 5537, CAL0000027257!) as the lectotype of C. multiflora, which supersedes the earlier lectotype designated by Sinha & Dutta (2016: 30). Interestingly Dr. U.C. Bhattacharyya, former Scientist of Botanical Survey of India, had annotated this specimen as lectotype on 9.6.1997 but did not validly typify the name by publishing his observation. Sinha & Datta (2016) commented that CAL herb. acc. no. 333230 [Darjeeling, 15.8.1870, C.B. Clarke 12369A, CAL0000027258!] is not from the type locality and hence cannot be a type material, and we agree with this statement that it is not a type material, but we could not make out why they did not mention about C.B. Clarke 5537 (CAL0000027257!) in their publication despite of annotating (on 12.9.2012) and confirming the identity of the specimen as Leptoboea multiflora (Clarke) Benth. ex Gamble (1881: 274).